Diesel Place banner

381 - 400 of 451 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
SS - Seeing is believing:




These are two examples, but there are many others, some of which I noticed when I visited the Quigley plant,
and others that I was able to deduce from the conversations I had with Quigley employees.

As it is, you know nothing about the work Quigley does except for a presumption of their reputation and from specific information that others have posted on here, a thread in which you posted factually incorrect information about Quigley parts availability and other things, which led to my renewed involvement to prevent others from being misled.

If you like Quigley's work so much, feel free to buy one.

As for me, this is the last time I will take the time to justify what I know to be true to you, because your post above is the latest example of being motivated by something other than intent to add value to this thread, which is *supposed* to be about determining the best / most feasible way to do a DIY 4WD conversion.

...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,506 Posts
There is a huge difference between figuring out a better way to do something and bashing a company. Those 2 examples you provided do not show a failure. It is your personal opinion that you feel that is not good enough for you. Which is no reason to bash Quigley.

I know nothing about Quigley ? For the past 20 years one of my customers is a stocking Quigley GM dealer. Since I am in the shop roughly 2x/year and get to talk to the mechanics who actually work on them I ask questions every time I see one in there. In those 20 years those mechanics have not told and or physically showed me a failed Quigley part or fabrication failure. Granted it is only 2x year for the past 20 years but I think my sample field of real world experience might be a little larger than yours.

You have a documented history of bashing companies on forums when you did not get things your way. This appears to be happening again with Quigley and I am guessing since they would not sell you everything in kit form so you can DIY you have chosen the bash Quigley route. That is wrong since Quigley has done nothing to you. If you owned a Quigley and had documented proof of failures then flame on.

There is nothing I enjoy more than when people come up with better ways to do something and I hope someone actually does it right here so I can read/learn about it. What I do not enjoy reading is someone bashing a reputable company for no good reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joey D

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Just double-checked the frame spacing. It's a little over 30" in the area shown by the red arrows on the drawing below.

The ironic thing is, the only reason this 4WD upgrade is even possible is because, just like on pickups, the engine is offset to the right significantly.
Inside of left frame rail to engine centerline is about 17.5" (it's less than 13" from engine CL to the inside of the right frame rail).

And there's tons of room on the left side, in the area where the pre-2011 front axle center section (top mount) goes.
The steering gear is farther forward (relative to a pickup) so that's no problem.

But the stock motor mount is in the way on the driver's side too.

The van motor mounts are completely different than a pickups, extending almost straight down to that crossmember that has to be cut away to clear the output driveline (the output flange is in this area and the CV half-shafts extend outward from the same area occupied by the crossmember that the OEM motor mounts are attached to.

But the pickup-truck style motor mount brackets will work, as long as the body is off so there's access to weld them on.
Photo below shows how pickup truck motor mount extends almost horizontally.
On a van frame it would be closer to the top of the frame rail (top of bracket probably would tie into the spring perch).
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Attached photos show a lot of useful info:

Second photo (2011 Quigley) shows the left (driver's) side front axle rear mount bolt head circled in red.

It's down so low that it forced them use a lower hanging and more complicated crossmember that would otherwise be possible (blue line), which would be similar to the OEM square tube member:

that has to be removed when Quigley adds a front axle.

The 2011+ front axle, left side mounts are in the area of the yellow box, roughly at the axle centerline (see other photos below), where it would be conmfortably above the LCA rear pivot. The shape behind that orange line is not OEM, it's a Quigley-added bracket that supports the motor mount, and it's generally similar to the pickup truck motor mount shown in the previous post.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Can you find the motor mount support in the frame pics from artementy? I looked and never noticed that
Yep. It's there in Artementy's photos. (orange lines in the photo below).
But it's even worse than I realized... that is only a single plate that reinforces one side of what's left of the existing motor mount pad.
It looks like they attempted to support the other (front) side with some gusseting (blue outlines in the photos below)

These are all compromises made out of expediency, to avoid having to remove engine & body from the chassis.

From looking at other photos that show a wider view, it appears there is some distortion at/near these welded motor mount parts, slight on the driver's side, more significant on the passenger side, due to crash damage.

Crash damage that affects the chassis on a Quigley van (or a DIY conversion, for that matter) is an entirely different can of worms for the hapless owner who has to argue about repair cost with the insurance company. The difference in the DIYer's case is, he'll know that going in. A Quigley van buyer probably will not realize it.

...
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Man that is a lot of cutting away they did there. What would the alternative be if you had the body and possibly engine out if necessary? It seems like maybe the amount of things cut out was necessary? But maybe they did it in a sloppy way?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
Man that is a lot of cutting away they did there. What would the alternative be if you had the body and possibly engine out if necessary? It seems like maybe the amount of things cut out was necessary? But maybe they did it in a sloppy way?
Yes, it's a lot of cutting they did, and yes it is sloppy. But that's what happens when trying to do it without proper access.

Like I said before, what Quigley did was all (or at least mostly) compromises made out of expediency, to avoid having to remove engine & body from the chassis.

With body off & engine out, the alternative is to adapt pickup truck motor mount supports, or build something very similar from scratch, and then use pickup truck motor mounts.
(One thing that hasn't been shown in any of the photos posted yet, is the part of the motor mount on the engine is different - van vs. pickup, too. That's why the pickup truck MM supports have horizontal tubes running through them.)

One thing I've now learned from finally seeing excellent photos of as stripped-down Q-van chassis (THANKS AGAIN Artementy! :thumb:):
Having a Quigley van as a guide is not all that helpful, even if using the pre-2011 front axle.

Lots of photos are about all that's needed because the bottom line will be, the front axle will have to be located off of a fixed reference point (like the LCA pivots, or maybe a triangle formed by the LCA pivots and a simple jig extending inward from the wheel hub) that serves as a proxy for the front wheel centerline, and the front axle centerline will have to line up with that. All supports & brackets will have to be made to fit the front axle mounts while the front axle is held in place lined up with that centerline.

Aside from the deficiencies of their build, it's not just a matter of copying parts, because there's way too many pieces cut away and welded on for that to be as useful as I thought when I said it was, here.


...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,506 Posts
You do not have to remove the body to change motor mounts and if a person wants to change the mounts to a custom configuration it can be done with the body on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
So you are telling me all this (Outlined in red) can stay?
Never said that.

Or is some cutting necessary?
A lot of cutting is necessary. Almost everything in that crossmember that is below the bottom of the frame rail that is also forward of the rear lower control arm pivot bolt has to be removed (I'm guessing if the photo doesn't make it clear, that description probably doesn't either but it's about the only way I know how to describe it.)

So much has to be removed that it doesn't leave enough to support what's left of the OEM motor mount, which is why Quigley braced it to the extent they could do easily, considering that they can't really get to it without doing more disassembly.

Maybe the easiest way to put this is, that OEM mount doesn't lend itself to being supported from the direction where there's still something to tie into, which is why I've been saying that something more like the pickup truck mount would work better.

Looks like they added some more pieces to the driver side mount as well
At least part of that is how they cut it (on an angle), and the fact that part of the OEM crossmember is made of multiple overlapping layers. That mount originally bolted on with three bolts, which are barely visible in the video screen grab.

Photo below shows better what that looks like now... and other than the obvious: that there's a lot of cutting and welding there, I'm really not exactly sure what they did, but the end result isn't good. There's probably another gusset behind there (like the one outlined in orange on the driver's side) that can't be seen from this angle.

...
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
So the pickup motor mount would take the place of the van motor mount? And at that point the extra support would not be needed?

I'm really trying to understand fully your theory here, because i will be recreating my own conversion, weather i flat out copy Quigley's design with some improvements here and there, or if i get some better design tips that could make the build much better.

I get the idea that quigley took shortcuts, or at least did the best they could without taking the body and/or engine out. But with i'm trying to wrap my mind around is the idea of the "bad bracing" and sloppy cutting being remedied with the pickup mounts.

Are we talking about the same cutting (Better quality) and the substitution of the van mounts for the pickup mounts?

Or are we talking about Pickup mounts taking the place of the van mounts making less cutting necessary and no bracing needed?
And when and if changing the van mounts out for the pick up mounts, are we retrofitting the van mounts or completely breaking the welds and clearing that space for the pickup mounts that will be welded in their place?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
So the pickup motor mount would take the place of the van motor mount?
Yes

And at that point the extra support would not be needed?
The pickup truck support works in a pickup so... no, extra support would not be needed.

The only thing is, a "pickup truck style support" (whether a modified original piece, or built from scratch) must tie into the frame solidly, like it does on a pickup.

I'm really trying to understand fully your theory here, because i will be recreating my own conversion, weather i flat out copy Quigley's design with some improvements here and there, or if i get some better design tips that could make the build much better.

I get the idea that quigley took shortcuts, or at least did the best they could without taking the body and/or engine out. But with i'm trying to wrap my mind around is the idea of the "bad bracing" and sloppy cutting being remedied with the pickup mounts.

Are we talking about the same cutting (Better quality) and the substitution of the van mounts for the pickup mounts?

Or are we talking about Pickup mounts taking the place of the van mounts making less cutting necessary and no bracing needed?
Yep. As long as the "pickup-style" mounts are properly tied to the frame, that's all the bracing needed. No patchwork of little welded-on gussets required.

And when and if changing the van mounts out for the pick up mounts, are we retrofitting the van mounts or completely breaking the welds and clearing that space for the pickup mounts that will be welded in their place?
You got it!


I covered this in previous posts like this one when I first mentioned this, but they had a lot of other info too, so I'll try to make this more concise.

This photo:


...shows the driver's side motor mount support on a pickup (or SUV, same frame in this area).
It is roughly in the middle of the photo and has two tubes running through it.
In a pickup, the front axle output flange passes almost directly under this.


This photo:

...shows the same area on a van, and the front edge of the OEM van motor mount, which as Artementy's video confirms, goes almost straight down.

This photo is from a very different angle than the first one, but it should be good enough to mentally correlate with the photo above.

It it noteworthy that the area *above* the OEM motor mount is not obstructed by anything that can't be moved (in this case, two brake lines and a corrugated plastic wire sheath).

So, imagine that you had a pickup-truck style motor mount support attached to the frame in the area *above* where the OEM mount is located... Adding to this is the fact that the part that bolts to the engine is shaped different on a pickup than a van, and that helps too. It would then clear the front axle output, even more than it does in a pickup, because the van's engine is about 4" (maybe 5") farther back than a pickup.

Whether or not an actual pickup truck mount would work or not is unknown (my guess is that it might be slightly short) but it would not be hard to make it work, or make another one very similar to it that would work.

...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
I follow you. I guess that is one of those things where you have to be there to do it. You would have to have everything torn down to be able to test fit the pieces to see if they fit and what not
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
yep... and I've been studying this problem for so long, and now have good dimensional drawings, that I know what fits and what doesn't almost by heart.

BTW, please read the version of my post above as it is now.
I had several edits for clarification, but I'm done now.

The main thing boils down to this: the oem van mounts come almost straight up to the engine from a crossmember that interferes with front axle output flanges,
whereas the pickup mounts come almost horizontally from the frame *above* the front axle output flanges.

The van's engine is farther back than in a pickup, which might have avoided this problem if it was more than 4" or 5" (in which case the motor mounts would have been completely behind the front axle output flanges, but as it is, 4" or 5" is not enough and there's still interference.

...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
So do you see any hope in keeping the standard Quigley approach and maybe adding some better supports, and obviously not cutting more than necessary?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
364 Posts
So do you see any hope in keeping the standard Quigley approach and maybe adding some better supports, and obviously not cutting more than necessary?
Hope? Well, Quigley does it this way all the time, so of course it's possible.
Something like their approach is probably about the only way to do it without removing the engine and body, or without mounting the front axle on a 5" lift kit.

But they've made a lot of compromises that affect strength, especially in the area of the motor mounts where it's difficult to fully remedy and if the engine is out, I can't imagine why anyone would want to take this approach, because using different motor mount supports that go out to the side (like the pickup truck mounts) seems a lot easier to me.

This photo also shows the pickup truck motor mount supports:

and the two photos below have an attempt (in red) to show where similar 'pickup-truck-style' motor mount supports might be on a van.
Orange circle shows where there is no longer much of anything under that motor mount to support it. Top of shock absorbers should provide a fairly consistent reference point between pickup & van chassis.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Does seem like a lot of space under that motor mount. But somehow the Quigley design doesn't really see any known problems with the method they use. Nothing that i have ever heard about at least.
 
381 - 400 of 451 Posts
Top